ABSTRACT
The past twenty or so years have seen an unprecedented degree of critical reflection on the historiography of art, its philosophical implications, its guiding presuppositions, and its relations to other fields of academic discourse. This has been paralleled by a remarkable growth of interest in the history of the discipline. The discussion about the relation of art history and aesthetics is another example of such a process of reflection. What is remarkable about this reflection is the extent to which it relies on a hypostatized notion of art history; authors who have built up a reputation as commentators on the discipline frequently do so without reference to a single example of art-historical discourse. The foregoing debate is a case in point. There is plenty of reference to specific authors of aesthetic theories, but none to any art historians, save a rather lapidary discussion of Michael Baxandall who, on such occasions, stands as a signifier of enlightened “progressive” art history.
